Skip to main content
Glama

GovGazette

by io.github.mooshee
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Explain a vendor match

explain_match
Read-onlyIdempotent

Explain deterministic primary NAICS overlap between a registered vendor and opportunity. Not an eligibility determination.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
vendor_idYesStable vendor ID returned by search.
opportunity_idYesStable opportunity ID returned by search.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rulesYes
vendor_idYes
generationYes
interpretationYes
opportunity_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / opportunity_id / description
      Added value: +"Stable opportunity ID returned by search."
    • addedInput schema / properties / vendor_id / description
      Added value: +"Stable vendor ID returned by search."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$defs": {
+    "MatchRule": {
+      "properties": {
+        "matched": {
+          "type": "boolean"
+        },
+        "opportunity_value": {
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        },
+        "rule": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "vendor_value": {
+          "type": [
+            "string",
+            "null"
+          ]
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "rule",
+        "matched"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    }
+  },
+  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
+  "properties": {
+    "generation": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "interpretation": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "opportunity_id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "rules": {
+      "items": {
+        "$ref": "#/$defs/MatchRule"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "vendor_id": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "generation",
+    "vendor_id",
+    "opportunity_id",
+    "rules",
+    "interpretation"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already include readOnlyHint: true, idempotentHint: true, and destructiveHint: false, covering safety. The description adds value by specifying that it explains 'deterministic primary NAICS overlap' and is not an eligibility determination, which is behavioral context beyond the hints. However, it doesn't detail the exact nature of the explanation (e.g., textual vs visual) but that is partially covered by having an output schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose and ends with a crucial caveat. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has an output schema, so return value specifics are covered. Given its simple two-parameter input and the annotations, the description provides sufficient context for an agent to understand what the tool does and when to use it. Minor lack: omission of explicit alternative or exclusion scenarios, but the overarching purpose is clear.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema description coverage is 100%, meaning both parameters are described in the schema. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what's in the schema, but it does mention 'registered vendor' and 'opportunity' which aligns with the parameter descriptions. This is baseline 3 as schema already carries the semantic load.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the specific action ('Explain deterministic primary NAICS overlap') and the resources involved ('between a registered vendor and opportunity'). It also provides a crucial scoping caveat ('Not an eligibility determination') that distinguishes it from potential related tools like check_exclusions or research_opportunity, making the tool's specific purpose unmistakable.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context on when to use the tool: when explaining deterministic primary NAICS overlap between vendor and opportunity. However, it does not explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternative tools. The scoping note ('Not an eligibility determination') implies an alternative but does not name it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All GovGazette toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources